I thouht i was good at fantasy football :( - Fantasy Football Cafe 2014 Fantasy Football Cafe


Return to Football Talk

I thouht i was good at fantasy football :(

Moderator: Football Moderators

Re: I thouht i was good at fantasy football :(

Postby Regalus » Tue Sep 25, 2007 7:33 pm

While this has probably been said many times, I would have to agreee that FFB is more luck than FBB. If over 162 games you cant find yourself a good team, then your not a very good owner. Plus you can stream wins, K's, steals, etc. In 16 games, with a much smaller player pool is a lot tougher to build a championship team. When your loosing on Sunday, there is nothing you can do to try and better your team and pick up a win.(especially when WW is closed)

I pay more attention to Football, but cant deny I have not had as much consistancy when is comes to success. Unless your in a league with idiots, everyone else pretty much knows the hot pickups in football. In BB the more attention you pay, the better your chances of landing that "hot" player.
Regalus
Water Boy
Water Boy


Posts: 64
Joined: 25 Aug 2007
Home Cafe: Baseball

Re: I thouht i was good at fantasy football :(

Postby Yoda » Tue Sep 25, 2007 8:25 pm

It's very simple. Sample size. With only 16 games luck plays a far bigger role versus 162 games.
Yoda
Water Boy
Water Boy

User avatar

Posts: 73
Joined: 21 Jan 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball

Re: I thouht i was good at fantasy football :(

Postby knapplc » Tue Sep 25, 2007 9:06 pm

Yoda wrote:It's very simple. Sample size. With only 16 games luck plays a far bigger role versus 162 games.

It's actually 13-14, if you don't count playoffs, so the sample size is even smaller.
Image
How 'bout them Huskers!
knapplc
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
Cafe WriterCafe RankerGolden Eagle EyeCafe MusketeerCafe Blackjack Weekly Winner
Posts: 18961
Joined: 27 Dec 2004
Home Cafe: Football
Location: It's an L, not an I

Re: I thouht i was good at fantasy football :(

Postby eaglesrule » Wed Sep 26, 2007 8:31 am

i.e. the waiver wire

the other thing is, in baseball, people's "wire gems" are more in the eye of the beholder. Yes, everyone wants the emerging pitcher or stud bat like Ryan Braun. But there are also a lot of other considerations, some people really need the promoted closer, while others need steals, yet others need cheap power. If you are loaded at a certain spot (I had Ryan Howard and Albert Pujols this year in a keeper league) it didn't matter that Ryan Braun was emerging to me, where would I play him anyway, since I had a stud outfielder occupying my utility spot. For me, the gems came more on the pitching side, players with multi eligiblity,e tc.

in football, everyone wants the emerging WR or RB, unless you are really stacked. I think baseball has more long-term thinking in terms of how you are going to utilize the wire, and what you are lookign to accomplish with it. FFB is more about raw points in a value based drafting context. Baseball has more grey areas that is more akin to chess because some of it is analaysis, some of it is an art in terms of strategy and how you are going to allocate/use your players/material.
The opening scene of the movie "Saving Private Ryan" is loosely based on games of dodgeball Brian Dawkins played in second grade.
eaglesrule
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar

Posts: 2843
Joined: 3 Dec 2003
Home Cafe: Football

Re: I thouht i was good at fantasy football :(

Postby josebach » Wed Sep 26, 2007 8:57 am

JasonSeahorn wrote:HEYYYYY don't rag on us ambulances!!!!! :-b


In no way did I mean to criticize the guys doing the projections. I think their projections are just fine. My point was you can't predict the unpredictable.

When I first started playing fantasy sports, I was a much bigger football fan than I was a baseball fan. As a matter of fact, when I played baseball for the first time 5 years ago, I hadn't watched a MLB game in almost 10 years. I say this because my belief that fantasy baseball is a better game than fantasy football does not come from any kind of bias. I still hardly ever watch baseball (I might have watched 3 games this year), but you don't need to watch it to follow the numbers and play fantasy.
Image
josebach
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar
Cafe Ranker
Posts: 4611
Joined: 27 Aug 2003
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Tallahassee, FL

Re: I thouht i was good at fantasy football :(

Postby DraftDodger » Wed Sep 26, 2007 10:02 am

How did this devolve into a FF vs. FB discussion? Any game where you get to make a lot of decisions is based more on skill than luck. Fantasy Football isn't Chutes & Ladders <shudder>. Would it be a better game if you could make immediate substitutions like a real coach? Yes it would. Is that practical for fantasy football sites? No. A skillful player's season will not be over because one of his studs is slow out of the gate or his keeper QB gets busted on dogfighting charges. Other players will face bad luck too.

I honestly didn't like most of the top "stud" RB picks going into this season. I was more interested in players like Addai and Westbrook than LT, LJ, SA, and SJAx. If I'd had a top three pick and had taken one of the consensus choices instead of going with my gut, I'd have no one to blame but myself at this point.

And that's where equalizers come in. The fantasy football sites remove a certain amount of skill from the equation. This one may remove more than most (yay!). The consensus, though it may not be far from right, is rarely dead on. Consensus picks are too conservative, by nature. Hey, I joined the bandwagon in downing Derek Anderson before he took a single game-time snap, and he showed us all wrong against Cinci.

Skillful FF players rely on more than who is supposed to have a good game or a good season. We have a special set of dice that show players' faces, and we roll them to see who will have the best week or season ...
DraftDodger
Head Coach
Head Coach

User avatar
Cafe Writer
Posts: 1400
Joined: 24 Aug 2002
Home Cafe: Football
Location: The Cafe

Re: I thouht i was good at fantasy football :(

Postby josebach » Wed Sep 26, 2007 11:11 am

DraftDodger wrote:How did this devolve into a FF vs. FB discussion? Any game where you get to make a lot of decisions is based more on skill than luck. Fantasy Football isn't Chutes & Ladders <shudder>. Would it be a better game if you could make immediate substitutions like a real coach? Yes it would. Is that practical for fantasy football sites? No. A skillful player's season will not be over because one of his studs is slow out of the gate or his keeper QB gets busted on dogfighting charges. Other players will face bad luck too.

I honestly didn't like most of the top "stud" RB picks going into this season. I was more interested in players like Addai and Westbrook than LT, LJ, SA, and SJAx. If I'd had a top three pick and had taken one of the consensus choices instead of going with my gut, I'd have no one to blame but myself at this point.

And that's where equalizers come in. The fantasy football sites remove a certain amount of skill from the equation. This one may remove more than most (yay!). The consensus, though it may not be far from right, is rarely dead on. Consensus picks are too conservative, by nature. Hey, I joined the bandwagon in downing Derek Anderson before he took a single game-time snap, and he showed us all wrong against Cinci.

Skillful FF players rely on more than who is supposed to have a good game or a good season. We have a special set of dice that show players' faces, and we roll them to see who will have the best week or season ...

Picks that are consensus become consensus because there is evidence to warrant it. Disregarding such evidence and drafting base on gut alone (which it sounds like what you're doing) doesn't sound like a recipe for success to me.

Are you really saying if given the choice you would have picked Addai or Westbrook with the #1 pick? :-?
Image
josebach
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar
Cafe Ranker
Posts: 4611
Joined: 27 Aug 2003
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Tallahassee, FL

Re: I thouht i was good at fantasy football :(

Postby DraftDodger » Wed Sep 26, 2007 12:06 pm

josebach wrote:Picks that are consensus become consensus because there is evidence to warrant it. Disregarding such evidence and drafting base on gut alone (which it sounds like what you're doing) doesn't sound like a recipe for success to me.

Are you really saying if given the choice you would have picked Addai or Westbrook with the #1 pick? :-?


What is the purpose of having the #1 pick and using it on a guy you think it's going to be #5 or #10 overall? If I were in a position to trade the #1 for a #5 and some sort of consideration, that's what I'd do. A lot of FF sites were low on LJ and SA this year, but didn't have the guts to move them out of the top 5 or so picks. Likewise I had a bad feeling about St. Louis getting rid of Curtis and McDonald, who've been excellent outlet receivers for Bulger (and Curtis really deserved to be the new #2 guy). Did I think they would fall so far so fast? No, but the writing was on the wall. Fantasy studs like LT rarely repeat, but again his production is much lower than generally expected. I'm no Rivers fan, so again he made me nervous. Addai was, and still is, my choice for #1, the featured back on one of the league's highest-powered offenses. So yes, if the pick couldn't be traded, I'd have taken him #1 and I wouldn't have shed any tears if he was #3 or #8.

The "consensus" becomes the "consensus" because nobody wants to look like an idiot compared to the other forecasters. It's safe to pick the guy everyone is talking about. This is what happened with Larry Johnson. The same forecasters who cited his age, his carries, the QB change, etc. as reason for him to fail, kept making him a Top Five selection. We saw this with Priest Holmes too. Everyone's "gut" says this guy is going to have an off year, but they mentally harass themselves into the herd mindset.

Yes, I do think my "gut" is better than logic, because my "gut" encompasses logic, past performances, personnel changes, coaching changes, viewing experiences, etc.

Favre and the Packers were supposed to suck @$$ this year---remember? That's what the experts said (and I'm not going to claim I was thinking any differently). But I'm sure some players were looking at Green Bay more closely and thinking, "Hey, there's a real team here this year."

Same with Houston. Everybody talked about how improved they were but no one wanted to admit they were any good.

The consensus pick will usually be wrong; it's less likely to have glaring errors, but the safest pick is rarely the best pick.
DraftDodger
Head Coach
Head Coach

User avatar
Cafe Writer
Posts: 1400
Joined: 24 Aug 2002
Home Cafe: Football
Location: The Cafe

Previous

Return to Football Talk

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: BuhBeannyhavy and 6 guests

Forums Articles & Tips Start & Sit Sleepers Rankings Leagues


Get Ready...
The 2014 NFL season kicks off in 16:07 hours
(and 41 days)
2014 NFL Schedule


  • Fantasy Football
  • Article Submissions
  • Privacy Statement
  • Site Survey 
  • Contact